Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Corporation Regulation By State and Nation

1908; SAGE Publishing; Volume: 32; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1177/000271620803200106

1552-3349

Henry M. Hoyt,

Corporate Law and Human Rights

The topic is &dquo;The State and the Nation as Units of Control,&dquo; with especial reference to the regulation of corporations.Just as in the field of natural law smaller units combine to form an organ- ism which is not a mere aggregate of the inferior units but a new entity, and through an ascending series, organisms of differenti- ated function unite in a complete individual existence, so in muni- cipal and conventional law, that is, the law of constitutions and statutes, there is no inconsistency between the nation as a unit of control and a state as a unit of control-between the ultimate unit and the separate unitary members.The state correlates and regulates the activities of persons, natural and artificial, and the func- tions of the municipal sub-divisions within her borders.The man- ifest tendency of the present time is for the general government so to correlate the states and to exercise its powers just as far as may be done under the constitution to that-end.There have been antagonisms in the past between the lesser sovereign units besides the great antagonism of the Civil War, which merged all former antagonisms and welded the state units and the national unit into an indestructible and perfect union.It seems strange now to recall, for instance, the sanguinary conflicts in this state between Pennamite and Yankee, which almost amounted to war between Connecticut and Pennsylvania, and yet did not involve the nascent federal power.No one would dream that in any like case now the national sovereignty would not instantly interpose between the contending forces.What a space has been traversed since the days when, very doubtfully, the Supreme Court determined boundary disputes between states, refus- ing to pass to other controversies between them!For now the court determines without doubt and with plenary jurisdiction that, for example, the United States, by its legislative and executive branches, cannot interpose in a conflict between two states over the irrigation use of the water of an interstate stream, but that the